With "would", it is necessary to have an already established past time-frame. The past time-frame is often established by a previous occurrence of "used to" or by time adverbial expressions (e.g. years ago, when I was a child).

I don't really understand it (good if I heard your interpretation); That which I do understand sounds only slightly true too. Your thoughts?

What you see, yet can not see over, is as good as infinite. ~Thomas Carlyle

With "would", it is necessary to have an already established past time-frame. The past time-frame is often established by a previous occurrence of "used to" or by time adverbial expressions (e.g. years ago, when I was a child).

This statement is true in cases where would is not used in the conditional. With future in the past and repeated actions, there must be a temporal reference point.

When I was young, I would....I told you [at some point] that I would...

But this is not the case with conditionals.

Yet another different interpretation of the sentence. Perhaps there is no agreement because the sentence is too clipped to know for sure...

If I read the sentence as a conditional (I would if I could), and Slava reads it as future in the past (later on, I would attempt...), then, yes, it is too clipped.

With future in the past and repeated actions, there must be a temporal reference point.

When I was young, I would.... I told you [at some point] that I would...

Thanks.

Why does it need a reference point? What else could 'would' refer (but the past)? Would is a past tense modal used in the future in the past or past repeated actions, so is it not clear it refers to the past without a reference point?

When I was young, I would count chickens. I would count chickens.

Both refer to the past.

What you see, yet can not see over, is as good as infinite. ~Thomas Carlyle

Why does it need a reference point? What else could 'would' refer (but the past)? Would is a past tense modal used in the future in the past or past repeated actions, so is it not clear it refers to the past without a reference point?

When I was young, I would count chickens.I would count chickens.

Both refer to the past.

Not necessarily. The second sentence could mean I would count chickens, but I can't count,I would count chickens, but I am busy counting my money, etc. In other words, without a temporal reference, the sentence could be future in the past or conditional--with very different meanings.

In the context of a conversation, the reference might not necessary, but out context, it is.

Not necessarily. The second sentence could mean I would count chickens, but I can't count,I would count chickens, but I am busy counting my money, etc. In other words, without a temporal reference, the sentence could be future in the past or conditional--with very different meanings.

In the context of a conversation, the reference might not necessary, but out context, it is.

How are these conditionals? (I do see the ambiguity)

What you see, yet can not see over, is as good as infinite. ~Thomas Carlyle

1. Future in the past (I knew what would happen).
2. Past, indicating habit (When I was young, I would often watch football on Saturdays).
3. Past, indicating determination (I tried to dissuade her from marrying him, but she would do it).
4. Conditional (If I were to see him, I would speak to him).
5. Implied conditional (I would do the same in your position [= if I were in your position]. I would never say that [= even if the occasion arose]. That would be nice [= if it happened]. I would count chickens [= if I could], but I can't count.)
6. (Archaic) Present tense, meaning "want(s) to" (The man who would be king.)
7. (Informal) Present (?) tense, used to 'soften' the main verb (Would you be saparris, by any chance? I wouldn't know about that. Ah, that would be the one!)
8. In the phrase "Would that..." [= "I wish that..."]